3Purpose for which the mobile phone is used. http://sajim.co.za/index.php/SAJIM/article/downloadSuppFile/424/246

These results indicate that most respondents had the basic knowledge to use mobile phones (average usage experience exceeds 4 years) and had similar phone features (e.g. video, email, MMS, camera, speak phone, Internet, SMS and voice). The results also suggest that entertainment is the most common reason why students use mobile phones. Reliability test Reliability The Cronbach Alpha results in Table 4 indicate a good measure of internal validity for some variables. Nature of knowledge and social ties scored above the threshold of 0.70 (Hair et al. 2006:137) whilst success, time and motivation scored slightly below the threshold. This could be attributed to the fact that only a few items were used to measure these three constructs. We, however, decided to use these items since the scores were very close to 0.70.

Social ties In order to investigate the impact of social ties on knowledge transfer in a team project using mobile phones, the respondents were required to indicate who allocated them to project teams and the criteria used. It was expected that students who grouped themselves on the basis of friendship have closer social ties. The results indicate that students from Computer Science, Information Systems and Construction Economics departments allocated themselves to project teams and that friendship was used as a criterion. Students from Civil Engineering were grouped by their lecturer. Many did not know the criteria used by the lecturer. The results are presented in Table 5.

Since some students did not know the criterion for allocation, the distinction between those with weak and strong ties was based on who allocated them to different teams. Those who allocated themselves were considered to possess strong ties since they knew each other whilst those allocated by the lecturer may have not had much in common and as such had weak ties. Table 6 represents a summary of responses to the questions that measured the extent to which mobile phones were used to share knowledge, motivated students to engage in knowledge sharing and saved time during this process. A scale of 1 (indicates that the student strongly disagrees) to 5 (indicates that the student strongly agrees) was used.

Social ties and knowledge sharing The average score of students with strong ties on items B1–B8 was 4.32 whilst that of students with weak social ties was 4.09. These results suggest limited differences in the usage of mobile phone features hence, the nature of knowledge shared by the two groups. Both groups agreed that mobile phones were used for knowledge sharing. A Chi-square test was conducted which also confirmed that the difference in these results was not significant (Chi-square = 2.77, p = 0.175). Hypothesis 1 is therefore supported. Mobile phones can enable increased knowledge transfer and sharing of complex knowledge in groups with weak ties. This is consistent with Palen’s (2002) earlier observation that mobile phones in social networks increase access and relevance of membership in a network of social relationships thereby minimising impediments due to social ties. TimeItems D1–D4 (in Table 6) show the respondents’ perception of the time saving capabilities of mobile phones. The results indicate that students who use mobile phone features like SMS, MMS and email take less time to transfer knowledge and also to acquire knowledge from previous projects than those using voice facilities. There is therefore a relationship between time saving and the use of mobile phones. This is also confirmed by the significant association between D4 (time saving using SMS and MMS) and B1 and B2 (usage of SMS and MMS) as shown in Table 7. Knowledge transfer using voice was perceived to take longer by most respondents. This is perhaps due to the fact that students don’t use voice facilities effectively. They most likely store messages and never retrieve them.

Results of a correlation analysis (see Table 7) revealed a significant positive association (+0.34) between SMS and MMS usage (B1) and D4 (time saving using SMS and MMS). There is also a significant negative association (-0.12) between B1 and D3 (time saving using voice facilities). This suggests that even those who often make phone calls or make use of voice facilities find SMS and MMS less time consuming. However, no significant association exist between B8 (usage of speaker-phone features) and D3 (time saving using voice facilities) and also between B8 and D4 (time saving using SMS/MMS). Hypothesis2 is therefore partially supported. Knowledge is transferred in less time only where SMS, MMS and email are used. Motivation to share knowledge Students were asked to indicate whether mobile phones motivated them to share knowledge (see Table 6, C1–C3). The researchers compared the frequency of mobile phone usage (B1, B3 and B6) with mobile phone motivation (C1, C2, C3 and B9). Those who used mobile phones less frequently (e.g. mean score for B1, B3, B6 less than 4.00) were not motivated to share knowledge using mobile phones (e.g. mean score for C1, C2, C3, B9 less than 4.00). Table 7 shows a significant association between items (B1 and C1, and also between B3 and C3). Hence hypothesis 3 was supported since those who used mobile phones frequently were motivated to share knowledge with peers. Items B1–B8 (see Table 6) also captured the nature of knowledge transferred by the students. SMS, MMS, email, and graphics messages are considered to be explicit in nature. Discussions over the phone usually involve the transfer of tacit knowledge especially when no record of the interaction is codified. The results suggest that most teams (in all groups studied) transfer their knowledge by SMS, MMS and email. Voice messaging, voice recording and use of language facilities are not commonly used. Respondents were asked to comment on the type of knowledge shared and give the specific phone features used to achieve this. Follow-up interviews were conducted with eight students who indicated their willingness to be interviewed further. We found that most students mainly use text-based features, which suggests that mobile phones are mainly used for the transfer of explicit knowledge. Students in the humanities who deal with more tacit knowledge also frequently use features like MMS, SMS and email to share knowledge. They therefore leverage mobile technology to convert their tacit knowledge to explicit forms. Hypothesis 4 was therefore supported. Project success Students were required to indicate their project success in order to determine the extent to which mobile phones influenced project success. Those who had finished their projects were required to indicate their final marks while those who had not, rated their progress on a scale of 50% –100%. Table 8 presents the results of the completed projects.

The results indicate that teams from Civil Engineering and Construction Economics obtained between 61% – 70% in their projects results, Computer Science teams obtained 50% – 60% whilst Information Systems teams obtained (70% – 80%). Many students did however not acknowledge the contribution of mobile phones to the success of their projects. Only 37% of the respondents linked their success to the use of mobile phones. ConclusionThis study investigated the role of mobile phones in reducing knowledge transfer barriers caused by social aspects, the nature of knowledge, a lack of time, and a lack of motivation. Contrary to earlier literature (Fernie et al. 2003; Strahilevitz 2004), we found no significant difference in the nature of knowledge shared by teams with weak and strong ties. This suggests that teams with weak social ties which normally experience difficulties in sharing complex knowledge can resolve this problem by adopting mobile technologies. The study also confirms that mobile phones enable codification of tacit knowledge and motivates knowledge sharing with peers. We however found that time barriers to knowledge transfer are perceived to be reduced only when knowledge is conveyed in explicit form (e.g. using SMS, MMS and email) than in tacit form (e.g. voice messages, phone calling, etc.). The fact that most students in this study did not utilise the affordances of mobile devices for tacit knowledge transfer raises much concern. Sternberg et al. (1995) argue that tacit knowledge allows individuals to achieve personal goals, job success and better performance. They add that it leads to effective management of oneself, other people and tasks. This suggests therefore that the sharing of tacit knowledge is beneficial to the learners not only in school but also in the industry. The present study did not investigate this issue in more detail during the interviews and these follow-up interviews only involved eight respondents, therefore caution needs to be exercised when generalising some of the findings. Future studies involving larger samples of learners should be conducted to examine the role of tacit knowledge in mobile learning and its impact on student performance. 1.AhmadNMentorD2010Mobile Learning: An Introductionviewed 15 June 2011http://www.studyplace.org/w/images/9/9f/Mobile_Phone_Learning_Syllabus_Spring_2010.pdf2.AjmalM.MKoskinenK.U2008Knowledge transfer in Project-Based Organisations: An Organisational Culture PerspectiveProject Management Journal3917153.BentaK.LCremeneMPadureanR2005Multimedia m-learning using mobile phonesJ. Attewell & C. Smith-SavillMobile Learning Anytime Everywhere: A Book of Papers from MLEARN 20042728Learning and Skills Development, London, UKviewed 12 January 2008http://elearning.typepad.com/thelearnedman/mobile_learning/reports/mLearn04_papers.pdf 4.BlauP1974Parameters of Social StructureAmerican Sociological Review395615355.BlumenfeldP.CSolowayEMarxR.WKrajcikJ.SGudzdialMPalincsarA1991Motivating Project Based Learning: Sustaining the Doing, Supporting the LearningEducational Psychologis263 & 43693986.CalongneC2008Educational Frontiers: Learning in a Virtual world Educause review435Sept/October7.Cheung S.L2005Using Mobile Phone Messaging as a Response Medium in Classroom ExperimentsJournal of Economic Education39151678.DerballaVPousttchiK2004Extending Knowledge Management to Mobile Workplacespaper presented at the International Conference on Electronic Commerce, Delft, NetherlandsOctober 25–27, 20045835909.DistererG2002Management of Project Knowledge and Experiences Journal of Knowledge Management6551252010.FernieSGreenS.DWellerS.JNewcombR2003Knowledge Sharing: Content, Confusion and ControversyInternational Journal of Project Management2117718711.ForayDHargreavesD.H2003The production of knowledge in different sectors: A model and some hypothesisLondon Review of Education1171912.HairJ.FBlackW.CBabinB.JAndersonR.ETathamR.L2006Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th edn.Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey, NJ13. HammondNBennettC2002Discipline differences in role and use of ICT to support group based learningJournal of Computer Assisted Learning181556314.HansenM.T1999The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunitsAdministrative Science Quarterly4418211115.HansenR.S2006Benefits and Problems With Student Teams: Suggestions for Improving Team ProjectsThe Journal of education for business821111916.HattangdiAGoshA2008Enhancing the quality and accessibility of higher education through the use of Information and Communication Technologyviewed 13 August 2010http://www.iitk.ac.in/infocell/announce/convention/papers/Strategy%20Learning-01-Ashish%20Hattangdi,%20%20Atanu%20Ghosh.pdf17.JewelsTFordM2006Factors influencing Knowledge sharing in Information Technology projectE-service Journal519911718.JoshiK.DSarkerSSarkerS2007Knowledge transfer within information systems development teams: Examining the role of knowledge source attributes Decision Support Systems43232233519.KooleM2005A model for framing Mobile LearningM. AlleyMobile Learning: Transforming the Delivery of Education and Training: Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication2647Athabasca University Press, Athabasca, AB20.LiMGaoF2003Why Nonaka highlights Tacit Knowledge: a Critical ReviewJournal of Knowledge Management7461421.LiaoS-HChangJ-CChengS-CKuoC-M2004Employee relationship and knowledge sharing: A case study of a Taiwanese finance and securities firm Knowledge Management Research & Practice21243422.LightnerRBenanderRKramerE.F2008Faculty and Student Attitudes about Transfer of Learningviewed 10 March 2009http://www.insightjournal.net/Volume3/FacultyStudentAttitudesTransferLearning.pdf23.LindquistDDenningTKellyMMalaniRGriswoldW.GSimonB2007Exploring the Potential of Mobile Phones for Active Learning in the Classroompaper presented at the Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education Conference, Kentucky, USA, March 07–11, 200724.MajorE.JCordey-HayesM2000Engaging the business support network to give SMEs the benefit of foresightTechnovation201158960225.MellowP2005The media generation: Maximise learning by getting mobileviewed 15 June, 2011http://www.learningdirectorsnetwork.com/refdocs/Maximise_Learning_by_Getting_Mobile.pdf26.MotelebAWoodmanM2007aNotions of Knowledge Management Systems: A Gap AnalysisElectronic Journal of Knowledge Management (eJKM)51556227.MyersM.D1997Qualitative Research in information Systems’MIS Quarterly21224124228.NonakaITakeuchiH1995The Knowledge – Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of InnovationOxford University Press, Oxford, UK29.NonyongoEMabuselaKMoneneV2005Effectiveness of SMS Communication between University and Studentspaper presented at The 4th Conference on Mobile Learning, Cape Town, South Africa, October 25–28, 200530.OlikowskyW.JBaroudiJ.J.1991Studying Information Technology in Organisations: Research approaches and assumptionsInformation Systems research2112831.PalenL2002Mobile Telephony in a connected lifeCommunication of the ACM453788232.PollackJ2006The New Media Landscape: 2006viewed 23 August 2008http://newmedialandscape.com/e107/e107_files/downloads/pmc/PMC_02.06.2006.pdf 33.PousttchiKTurowskiKWeizmannM2003Added value-based approach to analyze electronic commerce and mobile commerce business modelsR.A.E. Andrade, J.M. Gómez, C. Rautenstrauch & R.G. Riosroceedings of the International Conference of Management and Technology in the New Enterprise, La HabanaApril 22–25, 20034142334.PrenskyM2004What can you Learn from a Cell Phone? Almost AnythingPaper presented at The 4th Conference on Mobile Learning, Cape Town, South AfricaOctober 25–28, 200435.RotoV2006Web Browsing on Mobile Phones- Characteristics of user experience, unpublished doctoral dissertationviewed 22 September 2008http://www.lib.tkk.fi/diss/2006/isbn95/2284707/isbn95122847071.pdf36.SarkerSSarkerSNicholsonDJoshiK2003Knowledge transfer in Virtual Information Systems Development Team: an Empirical Examination of Key Enablerspapers presented at The 36th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science, Big Island, Hawaii, USA January 6–9, 200337.SchindlerMEpplerM.J2003Harvesting Project knowledge: A review of project learning methods and success factorsInternational Journal of Project Management2121922838.SharplesM2005Learning As Conversation: Transforming Education in the Mobile Agein Proceedings of Conference on Seeing, Understanding, Learning in the Mobile Age, Budapest, HungaryApril 28–30, 200514715239.SharplesMTaylorJVavoulaG2005Towards a Theory of MobileLearningH. van der Merwe & T. Brown, Mobile Technology: The Future of Learning in Your Hands, mLearn 2005 Book of Abstracts, 4th World Conference on mLearning, Cape Town25–28 OctoberCape Town: mLearn 200558viewed January 15, 2008 http://www.mlearn.org.za/CD/papers/Sharples-%20Theory%20of%20Mobile.pdf 40.SternbergR.JWagnerEWilliamsWHorvathJ1995Testing common senseAmerican Psychologist501191292741.StrahilevitzL.J2004 A social networks theory of privacyThe Law School, University of Chicago. The Social science research network electronic paper collectionviewed 05 January 2008http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=629283 42.SzulanskiG1996Exploring Internal Stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firmStrategic Management Journal17274343.WagnerE.D2005Enabling Mobile Learningviewed 15 June 2011http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0532.pdf44.WallimanN2006Social Research MethodsSage Publications, London, UK.